Pritam Singh v. State, AIR 1950 SC 169: 1950 SCR 453 Article 141 of The Indian Constitution Manikchand v. Elias, AIR 1969 SC 751

ts a question of law as well as public interest.
The party while going for an SLP has to submit a short summary of the relevant issues and facts
that occurred during the case and should also mention the date in chronological order in which
the events happened. The summary should also include the question of law that a party
(aggrieved party) has, these questions must be related to certain laws and should be related to
general public too.
If the appeal is accepted and registered, depends upon the discretion of court, the aggrieved party
gets the chance to be heard before the court. On depending the qualities and merits of the suit the
court will issue a notice against the respondent to issue a counter-affidavit to this suit. It is the
occasion, when the Apex Court decides whether to grant SLP or not 1, if Granted the case will be
converted into a civil suit and hearing will begin from beginning.
The Apex court may change the previous verdict, may give some additions to it or fix with the
earlier judgment. The Supreme Court also has the power to send back the suit or appeal to lower
or subordinate courts if court thinks that some issue are left undiscussed.
The Supreme Court’s judgment is declared as law of the land and is binding on all courts in
India.2
Usually petitioner gets the opportunity to file a SLP before Supreme Court within 90 days,
however the court may increase this time period on its discussion.
1. Essentials in SLP:
 Special Leave petition can be filed in subsequent situation: SLP can be filed against
any judgment or decree or order of any High Court /tribunal in the territory of India. Or,
SLP can be filed in case the High court refuses to grant the certificate of fitness for
appeal to Supreme Court of India3.
 Time period in which SLP can be filed: Special leave petition can be filed within 60
days if HC refuses to grant the fitness certificate to plea to higher authority. Though
1
Pritam singh v. State, AIR 1950 SC 169: 1950 SCR 453
2
Article 141 of the Indian Constitution
3
Manikchand v. Elias, AIR 1969 SC 751
normally Special leave petition can be filed before or within 90 after the verdict or order
of High court.
 Special leave petition can be filed by: Any petitioner or aggrieved(suffered) party
against the verdict of High court or subordinate court or when high court refuses to issue
fitness certificate, but it should be filed within prescribed time.
 Contents of Special Leave Petition: The party while going for an SLP has to submit a
short summary of the relevant issues and facts that occurred during the case and should
also mention the date in chronological order in which the events happened. The summary
should also include the question of law that a party (aggrieved party) has, these questions
must be related to certain laws and should be related to general public too.
The scope of Article 136 (1) is very wide and comprehensive and it invests the Supreme Court
with a plenary jurisdiction to hear appeals. Its broad and overriding nature will be evident from
its following features:4
 (1) Under it, in suitable cases. Supreme Court can even disregard the limitations
contained in Articles 132 to 134 on its appellate Jurisdiction and hear appeals which it
could not otherwise hear under these Articles.5
 (2) Articles 132 to 134 deal with the right of appeal against final decision of the High
Courts. Article 136 (1), on the other hand, uses the words, “any court” and thus
empowers the Supreme Court to grant special leave to appeal from judgments not only of
High Courts but also from lower courts in India, even without having the recourse to the
usual procedure of filing an appeal in the High Court. 6 In Rajendra Kumar v. State7, the
Supreme Court heard an appeal from the decision of the Chief Judicial Magistrate. The
appellant did not go to the High Court but came straight to the Supreme Court. The
Supreme Court did however observe that it does not ordinarily entertain such petitions.
 (3) The word, “order” In Article 136 (1) has not been qualified by the adjective “final”. It
is thus clear that the Supreme Court can hear an appeal even from Interlocutory order.
4
Jagdish Chanana v. State of Haryana, (2008) 15 SCC 704
5
Delhi judicial service Assn. v. state of Gujarat, AIR 1991 SC 2176
6
M.P Jain, Indian Constitutional Law, 7th Ed., Lexis Nexis,p.229-
7
AIR 1980 SC 1510
 (4) Article 136 (1) does not define the nature of proceedings from which Supreme Court
may hear appeals. Therefore, such appeals may be heard by the court in any kind of
proceedings, whether civil, criminal, or relating to Income Tax, labour disputes, etc.
 (5) Article 136 (1) confers on the Supreme Court power to grant special leave against
orders and determination, etc. of any tribunal, which is very important aspect as a matter
of right of the Supreme Court.
 (6) Under Article 136 (1), the Supreme Court may hear appeal even though the ordinary
law pertaining to the disputes, makes no provision for such an appeal.
 (7) Being a jurisdiction conferred by the Constitution, it cannot be touched by ordinary
legislative process. It can be affected only by constitutional process.
 (8) The scope of this special appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is very flexible.
The matter lies within complete discretion of the Supreme Court8.
8
M.P Jain, Indian Constitutional Law, 7th Ed., Lexis Nexis,p.229-231
 CHAPTER-II
1. Objects and purpose of SLP:
The power conferred upon the SC by Art. 136 is “most desirable”. In terms of its significance, it
stands at no lower a footing than the one under Art.32. There is more than one reason why this
plenary power is expressly conferred by the constitution itself.
First, all the cases may not fulfill the conditions stipulated for the issuance of a certificate under
Art.132 to 134-A, and yet the case may involve an important question of law.
Second, the power under Art.132 to 134-A is limited to cases disposed by a HC, but matters
before Courts/Tribunals, other than a HC may, in the interest of justice, require intervention of,
and expression “substantial question of law”. Or its cognate expressions in the preceding
provisions, is very subjective and the opinion may differ from Judge to judge and from Court to
Court.
Forth, the SC may take into consideration the difference of opinions among various HCs on any
particular issue and may therefore exercise its power under Art. 136 with a view to finally settle
the question to bring about stability, uniformity and predictability of legal consequences.
Fifth, the constitution makers intended to reserve this power with the SC so that the SC may
interference in appropriate cases without depending exclusively upon the issuance of a certificate
by the HC, for its appellant jurisdiction.
The jurisdiction for Art.136 can best be appreciated by considering the consequences that would

Pritam Singh v. State, AIR 1950 SC 169: 1950 SCR 453 Article 141 of The Indian Constitution Manikchand v. Elias, AIR 1969 SC 751

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pritam Singh v. State, AIR 1950 SC 169: 1950 SCR 453 Article 141 of The Indian Constitution Manikchand v. Elias, AIR 1969 SC 751

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ts a question of law as well as public interest.

You might also like